STATE OF TASMANIA v BILLY GALVIN GORDON RILEY 4 OCTOBER 2019
COMMENTS ON PASSING SENTENCE PEARCE J
Billy Riley, you plead guilty to attempted aggravated armed robbery. At about 7.50 am on 13 February 2019 you and Liam Ransley went to a unit in West Launceston occupied by Benjamin Fraser. Mr Fraser and another man were at home. Your joint intention was to rob Mr Fraser of money to fund your use of illicit drugs. While you waited nearby Mr Ransley knocked on the door. When the door was opened you jumped a fence and ran towards the door carrying a rifle and a duffle bag. You pointed the gun at Mr Fraser who, when he saw this, slammed the door. You and Mr Ransley unsuccessfully tried to kick the front door of the unit open. While doing so you shouted abusive and aggressive demands for money and threatened to shoot Mr Fraser. When you could not get the door open you both fled on foot. Although you were wearing gloves your face was not covered and you were quickly identified from the CCTV camera at the front door. The CCTV recording shows you running with and pointing the rifle in a frighteningly aggressive way. You were found and arrested a week later. When interviewed you denied your involvement and claimed to have been at home.
You are now aged 24. You are an aboriginal man. You have the support of your family and members of the aboriginal community. You were brought up by your mother and older sister after your father was imprisoned for murder. You have a five year old daughter who is in the care of her mother. Until 2016 you were employed by the Aboriginal Land Management Council on Mount Chappell Island. When that job finished, and you could not find other employment, you were introduced to methylamphetamine. You had been in some trouble before then, which led to a probation order and community service, but as your addiction worsened family relationships became strained, your accommodation became unstable and the seriousness of your offending escalated. During 2017 you committed driving and drug offences, including evading the police, and twice assaulted a police officer. Then, on 28 October 2017, you committed an attempted aggravated armed robbery. With another man you went to a house in Launceston with a replica pistol and a pogo stick and demanded money from people who turned out to be French backpackers. Your drug use was interrupted for a few months after you were charged for that crime and bailed to live with your aunt on Flinders Island, but it resumed in February 2018 when you returned to live on mainland Tasmania. In January 2018 a magistrate deferred a sentence for some other offences you had committed and then, on 4 June 2018, imposed a wholly suspended sentence of imprisonment. No doubt those orders were made to give you a chance to address your drug problem, but it did not work. You kept committing offences. On 18 April 2019 a magistrate sentenced you to imprisonment for five months. That sentence was formally expressed to commence on 30 October 2018 to take account of earlier periods you had spent in custody, although you were obviously not in actual custody on 13 February 2019 when the crime I am dealing with was committed. You have been in continuous custody since your arrest on 20 February 2019. Then, on 22 May 2019 you were sentenced in this court for the attempted aggravated armed robbery to imprisonment for 16 months from 21 March 2019 with eligibility for parole after having served half of that sentence. All of the time you have spent in custody has already been taken into account. It makes it worse that you attempted this aggravated armed robbery while you were on bail for the other attempted aggravated armed robbery, as well as for many other serious summary offences. I must take into account the total effect of all of the sentences you will be required to serve, but the sentence imposed by Blow CJ, which you are still serving, has already been reduced to take account of that. You are presently subject to terms totalling 21 months. Without taking into account any remissions, you would have been eligible for parole after having served a total of 13 months, which on my calculations will be in November 2019. The sentence I must impose should not result in a total sentence which goes beyond a fair and just reflection of your overall criminality, taking into account the term you have already served and are still to serve. The sentence should not be crushing in the sense that it should not remove from you any hope for the future or the chance of rehabilitation. While you are in prison you have decided to rehabilitate yourself by vocational training and courses addressing illicit drug use. There is no victim impact statement and no indication of serious or lasting psychological impact. However, although the robbery was not successful, and you got away with nothing, what you did in the attempt amounted to a very serious crime. Courts have repeatedly emphasised the seriousness of armed robbery. Use of a firearm is a particularly aggravating circumstance. You did not merely carry the firearm but, with your hand on or near the trigger, you pointed it menacingly as you approached the door before it was closed. You threatened to use it, although by that stage Mr Fraser and the other occupant of the unit were on the other side of the door. There is no indication, one way or another, as to whether the gun was loaded. Even if it was not, and there was no risk of accidental discharge, the person you pointed it at was not to know that. You are still a relatively young man, but when young men commit very serious crimes, youth and the prospect of rehabilitation does not prevail over the importance of a sentence which properly addresses the need to punish you for what you did, deter you and others, and protect the public. This crime demands a significant term of imprisonment.
Because Mr Ransley has already been sentenced the question of parity arises. In other words, if everything is equal you should be sentenced to the same term. As between you, many things are equal. You were the one with the firearm but he participated in the attempted robbery knowing that and played an active role in the plan. He is a little younger than you, but otherwise your age and circumstances and record do not justify a different sentence. He was on parole at the time for a robbery in company in which one of his co-offenders had a firearm. The sentencing judge gave priority to his rehabilitation. I think that the course the judge took in that case was generous to Mr Ransley. He was made subject to a drug treatment order with a custodial part of two years. I think the length of that term was determined because it was associated with the drug treatment order. However, if the order is cancelled that is the term he is likely to have to serve. However, what is not equal is the dominant role you played in the immediate confrontation. You carried the firearm, you were the one who gestured with it as you did and you were the person who made express threats to use it. A longer sentence is required. However, I will reduce the term I would otherwise have imposed because it would be unfair if there was too much difference between the respective lengths of the sentences. I think that the prospect of your rehabilitation is best dealt with by allowing the earliest opportunity for your release on parole.
Billy Riley, you are convicted. You are sentenced to imprisonment for two and a half years, cumulative to the sentence imposed on 22 May 2019. I order that you are not eligible for parole until you have served half of that term. I record for completeness that the combined result of the sentences I have referred to is a total term of imprisonment of four years and three months from 30 October 2018, with eligibility for parole after having served two years and four months.